would u consider quitting second life if performance doesnt improve?

It runs well for me, and I'm still on Windows 2000.

Thanks to my new sooper-dooper rig, I'm running two instances of SL with 'High' settings at the moment, each on a separate 22" monitor, WinAmp (Elvis' Greatest Hits), Firefox, Photoshop and Adobe Acrobat.

I'll post an update later if I smell anything burning.

Great Balls of Fire!

Well my ISP gives me an unlimited 8GB for roughly 30 USD a month. Of course the actuality is quite different but I do ok for bandwidth while America sleeps and provided it doesn't rain, in which case the local council cuts the electrical supply.

My experience only improved since I joined. Support for my crappy Intel 945 embedded card improved, and the grid is way more stable then in the past. So no complains. Well, not too many

I'm astonished that anybody runs with 16x antialiasing as a regular setting; to me it looks crappy on the screen (although fine with highres snaps to disk, where there's lots more pixels to smear over--when it works, I mean). But aside from astonishment, I really have to wonder: does the same rig with the same settings really work better in other applications with similarly complex geometry? If so... *why*? Assuming the other apps are DirectX, are the GPU manufacturers' OpenGL driver interfaces to hardware antialiasing that bad?

"Unlike Second Life, most of the world’s (Blue Mars) content won’t be created by users; instead, they’ll license third-party developers, with whom they’ll share revenue from virtual item sales,"

This is way over the top on my evil corporation predatory-capitalist-create-profit-out-of-nothing-ponzi-scheme hit meter. LOL. No way I'd visit this place. But that's just me

Where is this quote from, Ian?

http://gigaom.com/2008/02/19/blue-mars-second-life-with-pro-level-content/11553/

Third paragraph

Cool, thanks!!!

ETA: This article is pretty old now, but it sounds as though not much has changed in the interim.

I can only repeat: BM = "Corporate," and "Sterile"

Unfortunately, I think that is the same vision the powers in The Lab want for SL.

I think that depends a lot on how open their 'registered developer' program is.

If it's strict, BM will die a slow, boring death. If it's pretty open, it may end up doing well.

Elvis stole Jerry Lee Lewis' song? That is really raunchy.

There hasn't been any good music since Joplin died, anyway.

Scott, not Janis.

on what settings, low ,ultra, what
my recommended settings are high , i can play on ultra for days withouth clearingmy cache 16x anitaliasing EVERYTHING turned up, then some days i can play GREAT on low. high fps even when they tank on the recommended settings which pisses me off because i'd prefer the performance to be high allthe time not hope it would be caws we take a load of pix in sl and when they are ood they are great as i learnt to shoot in windlightwhenit was in beta back in 07

we take a lotta pix and i spend a lotta time staring at myself lmaom besides my graphix card runs at 16x anitaliasing anyhow allaplications including sl

well if u apply for their open beta u can be a developer buy just fillin out some forms im a developer, but im committed to sl. PERFORMANCE is what is killin me now i mean isnt it time for linden lab tohire some professional coders to redo their entire code fromthe bottom up like apple did with their os years ago. decide exactly what they ant it to do and recode it, redo their software from scratch, im mean snowglobe? a better map, MAP. if you wanna be more professional, and offer better fare, dont dress up the grid by shunting adult crap to the periphery, give us something that works, because without a very basic level of performance that can be achieved by the widest possible audiencee ther is no market. things like snowglobe and windlight even aint crap if the grid isnt stable enough to log in from day to day or even hour to hour. geeze

I turn everything up to max except sky, with anisotropic and 4x AA, but I roll my draw distance down to 104 meters.

imean draw distancedoesnt changeanything when sl is performing well, so i leaveit at 256 or crankit up to 512 should remember and its fine when its fine and horrible when it isnt but then ifi go back to low its still good no lag soi shouldnt be disapointed, but i miss wha im missing

Sounds like something's wrong with your computer, Jumpy. When was the last time you applied the three Rs of Windows Administration to it? Reboot, Reinstall, Reformat? I mean, completely wipe everything and reinstall Windows from scratch. You just gotta do that sometimes... Windows left to itself gets flakier than a cat in a dandruff factory.

this IS a new windows xp instal, my machine came with vista and i uninstalled it i wanted xp on the the and only xp, prob need to optimize it but sl has been tardy for everyone lately

Oh, I thought this was something that had started happening on an existing system. If it's a new computer and you're not running the OS it came with it's pretty common to need to play musical drivers for a while.

No, I just bought a better PC that can run 2 instances of SL on Ultra graphics setting.

If I had to guess based on what's quoted above, I'd say it *might* be your virtual memory settings. Try setting it manually to 3Gb (around 3000 Mb) minimum size, and 6Gb maximum size. If your framerate tanks after being logged in for hours and hours (when it WAS running just fine), raise the maximum a bit.

Windows can struggle with the page file if it's set to auto and the file gets too large (it has to read all of it in order to read/write to it). Likewise, if it's set manually and the max size is too small, you'll be lagging while writing to the harddrive all the time. Using a fixed-size file (so windows doesnt try to resize it all the time), with a higher minimum size, and a maximum size just larger than you would ever use (in one runtime session) is the optimum setting for performance, while being less work for windows than using auto.